Filmmaker Josh Fox began to study hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” when a drilling company tried to lease his land to drill for natural gas. “They asked to lease 19.5 acres on the Upper Delaware River, on the border of New York and Pennsylvania, in a watershed that supplies New York, New Jersey, Philadelphia,” explained Fox in a phone interview. “At one point, they offered us $100,000. We got multiple offers — another one a month ago — I guess they didn’t get the memo about the movie.”

...

Despite the gas company’s assurance that drilling would not be invasive, Fox decided to investigate existing drilling sites. He had heard of problems occurring 30 miles away in Dimock, Pennsylvania. “I went there in February 2009,” he recalled, “and found the entire place upside down. It was swarming with huge trucks, people could literally light their water on fire, people and animals were getting sick, and there was an atmosphere of fear and betrayal. After a few trips there, I decided I had to get out West and find out if this situation was the exception or the rule. In Arkansas, Colorado, Wyoming, Texas, and New Mexico, I found a story of contamination and defeat.”

...

New York City, concerned about possible contamination of its drinking water in the upstate watershed, is opposed to fracking in New York State. A moratorium on drilling was imposed throughout the state last year, while the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) conducted an Environmental Impact Study (EIS). When the study was published last fall, it received over 14,000 public comments. The DEC is now sifting through the comments as part of the process of revising the document. Once the EIS is republished, companies can start applying for permits to drill, unless the state legislature renews the moratorium. To pay for the permit-granting infrastructure, Governor Paterson has proposed a severance tax on gas extraction, similar to the tax under consideration in Pennsylvania.

“It’s not likely the DEC will be rushing this,” said Conor Bambrick, a spokesman for Assemblyman Kevin Cahill. “He has been assured that the DEC will be doing its due diligence.” The bill currently under consideration, the most recent of several proposed, would extend the moratorium until May 15, 2011. “This one has gone the furthest and is currently on the Assembly floor,” explained Bambrick. “The regular session has wrapped up, but a few times a year, the legislature comes back to vote on specific issues. If it comes back into session soon, there’s a good chance it will be voted on.”

A timeout on fracking in New York would send a strong signal to the gas industry that it’s vital to understand the true costs of fracking and shale gas development and put strong protections in place before permits are issued.

Governor Patterson vetoes the fracking bill, but issues an executive order instead...

Gov. David A. Paterson of New York on Saturday vetoed legislation intended to curtail natural gas development using the technique called hydraulic fracturing until a closer review of its effects can be undertaken.

Instead, the governor issued an executive order instituting a moratorium that extends until July 1, 2011 — beyond the date specified in the legislation — and that more narrowly defines the types of drilling to be restricted.

The Times also found never-reported studies by the E.P.A. and a confidential study by the drilling industry that all concluded that radioactivity in drilling waste cannot be fully diluted in rivers and other waterways.

But the E.P.A. has not intervened. In fact, federal and state regulators are allowing most sewage treatment plants that accept drilling waste not to test for radioactivity. And most drinking-water intake plants downstream from those sewage treatment plants in Pennsylvania, with the blessing of regulators, have not tested for radioactivity since before 2006, even though the drilling boom began in 2008.

The New York Times collected data from more than 200 natural gas wells in Pennsylvania. Many of them are tapping into the Marcellus Shale, a vast underground rock formation. But a method being used to stimulate wells, called hydraulic fracturing, produces wastewater containing corrosive salts and radioactive and carcinogenic materials. In Pennsylvania, this wastewater has been sent through sewage treatment plants that cannot remove some of the contaminants before the water is discharged into rivers and streams that provide drinking water. The Times was able to map 149 of the wells.

Natural-gas drilling appears to be allowing potentially explosive methane gas to seep into some drinking-water wells in Pennsylvania and New York, according to a study by scientists from Duke University.

We can always count on our government to protect the environment from pollution right? NOT. If money is to be made protection goes out the window.Especially when the energy market is involved.

I can't help but wonder how many of our federal legislators have stock in energy companies. Conflict of interest is widespread in government (IMHO).Oops. Speaking of gov't is a no no on this forum, however gov't has become so entrenched in the lives of every person in this country that it is almostimpossible to have a conversation about anything without gov't being mentioned because gov't wants to control every aspect of it's citizens' lives these days.

I've not seen a NEW traffic intersection go up in the past three years, that doesn't have a spy camera attached to the support poles. I can't but wonder ifthis is for face recognition software to track every individual in the country. The cameras are aimed at the vehicles that go directly under the lightsrather than at traffic down the road.

Sorry

Last edited by tncaver on May 10, 2011 11:35 am, edited 2 times in total.

I think there is a better chance of stopping fracking in New York, there is a good bit of opposition around here since we saw what has happened in Pennsylvania. A moratorium was out in place awhile ago due to public fears about water contamination, but it is set to expire this year.

...last week, a peer-reviewed study published in “The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences” found that levels of flammable methane in drinking water wells were increased to dangerous levels when those wells were close to natural gas wells.

Four scientists from Duke University tested 68 drinking water wells in the Marcellus and Utica shale drilling areas in Pennsylvania and New York State. While most of the wells had some methane, water samples taken closest to active gas wells had on average 17 times the levels of methane detected in wells further away. Active drilling areas are defined as within one kilometer, or about six tenths of a mile, from a gas well.

Wow. That is an amazing array of government officials contributing or helping to gain contributions for a campaign.I was glad to see that a senior adviser for The Nature Conservancy contributed nothing to the campaign. Fracking wasa great idea only it doesn't seem to be as eco friendly as advertised. I wish it was. Our country needs energy but it doesnot need contaminated water.

It would be interesting to know if any and how many of the contributors own stock in the energy group who are doing the fracking.

Natural gas companies have been placing enormous bets on the wells they are drilling, saying they will deliver big profits and provide a vast new source of energy for the United States.But the gas may not be as easy and cheap to extract from shale formations deep underground as the companies are saying, according to hundreds of industry e-mails and internal documents and an analysis of data from thousands of wells.

Peter,With all due respect, the quotes (uncited) from your original post sound a bit melodramatic and over the top. This makes everything else the writer says suspect in my mind. It seems to me that the jury is still out on Fracture mining. I will state up front that I am usually very conservative in my politics, but where I would draw the line is when something being done directly impacts and affects those around us. If fracture mining is definitively shown to do what you and its critics claim, then I will be right there with you opposing it. But if these phenomena are an incredibly rare occurrence, and are being exaggerated by the liberals in the media, then I would welcome a way to extract more of this clean-burning fuel from the ground. Some of the sources that your do cite (The [green] Capital Insider, The NY Times) are not exactly unbiased sources of information.

Of course, if they were doing it in my backyard, I might feel a bit different about it.